Ruth Wanjiru Ngobia v Action Against Hunger
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court ruled that firing a probationary employee without following the contract's notice and evaluation terms was unfair, awarding her over Kshs.642,000.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether termination of the Claimant's employment by the Respondent was unlawful and unfair.
- 2.Whether the reliefs sought by the Claimant are deserved.
Key legal issues
#Whether termination of the probationary contract was lawful and fair
Termination was procedurally and substantively unfair, wrongful and unlawful.
The contract's Clause 7 required a performance evaluation at the end of the 3-month probation and 14 days' notice for termination during probation. The Respondent terminated 2 months into probation, ignored Clause 7, and purported to invoke Section 41, contrary to Section 42(1) and (4). No evaluation was done and the allegations of deleting restricted data were not proved; RW-1 conceded the ICT error and absence of evidence.
Whether the Respondent proved a valid reason for termination
No valid reason was established; the allegation that the Claimant deleted restricted HR folders was not proved.
The Claimant had authorised log-in credentials, the HR folder was not password-protected or restricted, and RW-1 acknowledged an ICT error. RW-1 admitted screenshots showing deletion were not produced in court and that no evidence showed the Claimant deleted the folders. The Claimant's response used 'may have deleted', an admission of possibility, not certainty.
Whether the Claimant is entitled to compensation for unfair termination despite only 2 months' service
Yes; the court awarded four months' salary as compensation, relying on the declaration of unconstitutionality of Section 45(3) in Momanyi.
Section 45(3) restricts unfair termination complaints to employees with at least thirteen months' service. The court, persuaded by Samuel G. Momanyi v Attorney General, held that the Claimant could complain of unfair termination despite short service, and awarded four months' salary considering the short service period and the unfairness.
Legal principles established
#- Fairness of termination requires both substantive justification and procedural fairness.
- Termination of a probationary contract must comply with Section 42(1) and (4) of the Employment Act and the contractual notice provisions, not Section 41.
- An employee with less than thirteen months' continuous service cannot claim compensation for unfair termination under Section 45(3), per Momanyi v Attorney General.
Court orders
#- 1.Compensation for unfair termination of employment of Kshs.571,237.2 (four months' salary).
- 2.Payment in lieu of notice of Kshs.71,404.65 (14 days' salary).
- 3.Total award of Kshs.642,641.85 subject to PAYE tax deduction pursuant to Section 49(2) of the Employment Act.
- 4.Interest on the awarded sum at Court rates from the date of Judgment until payment in full.
- 5.Respondent to issue the Claimant with a Certificate of Service pursuant to Section 51 of the Employment Act within thirty days of the Judgment.
- 6.Claimant awarded costs of the suit.
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original jurisdiction of the Employment and Labour Relations Court under the Employment Act (unfair termination claim)
Relief refused
#One month's salary in lieu of notice (Kshs.142,809.30) as claimed
Award reduced to 14 days' notice pay per Section 42(4) of the Employment Act and Clause 7 of the contract
Costs
The Claimant is awarded costs of the suit.
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the upshot, and having considered written submissions filed on behalf of both parties herein, Judgment is hereby entered for the Claimant against the Respondent as follows:
I award the Claimant the equivalent of four (4) months’ salary being compensation for unfair termination of employment.
The awarded sum shall be subject to PAYE (Pay As You Earn) tax deduction pursuant to Section 49(2) of the Employment Act.
The Respondent shall issue the Claimant with a Certificate of Service pursuant to Section 51 of the Employment Act, within thirty days of this Judgment.
The Claimant is awarded costs of the suit.
for a termination to pass the fairness test, there must be both substantive justification and procedural fairness.
Issues in the judgment
#Judgment delivery year stated as 2026, likely a typographical error given 2025 trial dates.
Termination letter date inconsistent: 24th August 2024 in Respondent's list versus 24th August 2023 in pleadings.
Termination date stated as 23rd August 2023 in paragraph 16 but 24th August 2023 in pleadings.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Ruth Wanjiru Ngobia v Action Against Hunger", Case Analysis (2026). Cause No. E891 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2026/2703/eng@2026-09-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.